Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
N. Korea Threatens U.S. With 'nuclear War'  
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17428 posts, RR: 46
Posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

"North Korea would respond to a pre-emptive U.S. military attack with an "annihilating strike and a nuclear war," the state-run media said Monday, heightening anti-U.S. rhetoric amid close scrutiny of its missile program."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/03/north.korea.ap/index.html

Some questions--
1) Are we sending any aid, monetary or food or otherwise, to North Korea these days?
2) What are South Korea and China doing lately? Seems like the "Sunshine policy" isn't working and North Korea doesn't want to have anything to do with anyone other than the US anyway...


E pur si muove -Galileo
53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2351 times:

If we don't Iraq them, then there's no reason to get your panties in a wad.

User currently onlineGordonsmall From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2001, 2101 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2344 times:

Big version: Width: 410 Height: 347 File size: 34kb



Statistically, people who have had the most birthdays tend to live the longest.
User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2340 times:

Are we playing "Who's Got the Dumbest Leader?" with North Korea? Bush would be dumb to attack North Korea, and Kim Jong Il would be dumb to start a nuclear war........

User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4780 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2320 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):
"North Korea would respond to a pre-emptive U.S. military attack with an "annihilating strike and a nuclear war,"

Unless their nuclear program is much further advanced than current estimates of a handful of warheads and their missiles suddenly gain 3,000km in range, I don't think anyone should be afraid of annihilation other than the North Koreans themselves. Its just all bluster.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17428 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2307 times:

Quoting Gordonsmall (Reply 2):

Your point being....?

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 1):
If we don't Iraq them, then there's no reason to get your panties in a wad.

Your point being....?

Quoting CPDC10-30 (Reply 4):
Unless their nuclear program is much further advanced than current estimates of a handful of warheads and their missiles suddenly gain 3,000km in range

...and if we kibbutz long enough such that they have the time to perfect their missile capabilities? I would think South Korea is very nervous regardless of what happens vis a vis the US?



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently onlineGordonsmall From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2001, 2101 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2305 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 5):
Your point being....?

The sharp bit at the end ...........  Silly



Statistically, people who have had the most birthdays tend to live the longest.
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7408 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2305 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CPDC10-30 (Reply 4):
Unless their nuclear program is much further advanced than current estimates of a handful of warheads and their missiles suddenly gain 3,000km in range, I don't think anyone should be afraid of annihilation other than the North Koreans themselves. Its just all bluster.

I'm not worried. Considering that almost 60 percent or greater of the population is malnourished, the people could hardly put up a fight. But this is just sabre-wrattling, by a moronic, dog-eating despot lookng for some attention from the US, S Korean and Chinese negotiators. It would royally piss off the N Koreans if we do shoot down their missile, rendering North Korea impotent, militarily. I'm more worried about one of the hottie-women tennis players being eliminated from the Q-finals at Wimbledon.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2300 times:

Is there no way for us to start sending money to the people of N. Korea covertly? Or to start propoganda that would get to the poor, malnutritioned masses of the country? Sort of like we did with the Soviets during the cold war. There is clearly a better way to handle this than with guns and bombs.


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17428 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2266 times:

Does the US even have to be involved?


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6793 posts, RR: 34
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2241 times:

You know, why is it that back in the good old days of MAD and the Cold War we used to promise that any attack would be met with overwhelming force, but now, with an even crazier tinpot dictator, we wet our pants and "warn" them not to test their missile?

When did our strategy toward nuclear weapons change?

Peace Through Strength with the Soviets....

Peace (hopefully) through really stern language with the North Koreans?


User currently offlineMonorail From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 625 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2206 times:

Kim Jong Il is just an attention whore. It wouldn't surprise me if this is his attempt to retake the spotlight after Israel made noise this past week.  scratchchin 


Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs!
User currently offlineGilligan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2097 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):
"North Korea would respond to a pre-emptive U.S. military attack with an "annihilating strike and a nuclear war," the state-run media said Monday

The big question there is how many times can we make the rubble bounce?

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 8):
Is there no way for us to start sending money to the people of N. Korea covertly? Or to start propoganda that would get to the poor, malnutritioned masses of the country?

We could go through the UN, you know, like a food for nukes program. It would really be a wonderful thing. All those dedicated UN workers helping to feed those poor NK's and not expecting a thing in return except a nuclear warhead!


User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2091 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 9):
Does the US even have to be involved?

Don't you think this kinda involves us...

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):
N. Korea Threatens U.S. With 'nuclear War'

I'm pretty sure we won't do a damn thing. But watch this build up to the next semi-Cold War. We can't go in there, so that just gives them more time to build.

I'm sure Oppenheimer is rolling over right now.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineBA747YYZ From Canada, joined Mar 2006, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2079 times:

By the time North Korea launches it, their country will be uninhabitable for hundreds of years, not like it is already!

User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2077 times:

For some reason I find myself thinking about a garter snake that once reared its head and challenged my power lawnmower.

The lawnmower won!



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31679 posts, RR: 56
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2068 times:

Trouble Ahead.Too much Hot Talk these days  Smile
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6793 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2042 times:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
For some reason I find myself thinking about a garter snake that once reared its head and challenged my power lawnmower.

The lawnmower won!

Except that the guy pushing our lawnmower is just talking about mowing the lawn, but will probably talk to the grass instead, and maybe water the plants.

Time to get tough with these bastards. Again, I'll ask anyone---when did our philosophical strategy change in dealing with nuclear countries?


User currently offlineWrighbrothers From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 1875 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2031 times:

I've been watching this develop, now N.Korea wouldn't launch an attack on South Korean or American troops unless they have to, or unless the country is about to crumble, however, i'm sure as long as we don't invade them, it will all be hype talk, and was possibly said just to keep the west on their toes , N.Korea wouldn't want to lose vital Allies such as China, by launching a nuclear weapon or invading a country.
At the end of the day, they've said that they will attack,if they are attack, so while we should not under estimate them, we shouldn't lose our heads about it.
I'm pretty anti-communist, and so will be glad to see the fall of North Korea, but it will most likely fall on its own accord, no need to invade them just yet, however, if needs be...

Quoting Slider (Reply 17):
Again, I'll ask anyone---when did our philosophical strategy change in dealing with nuclear countries?

Just a guess, but perhaps after the fall of the USSR ?

Kim Jong II, is most likely twiddling his thumbs, in his big palace, eating on 2nd servings of steak, while his population starve, and give up lots of things just to keep the empire going.
The people will not put up with it forever, especially once someone breaks news of what things are like in the west, but sadly, as long as he has the power of the people, and the military, the country will survive for a while yet

Wrighbrothers



Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17428 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2031 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 13):
Don't you think this kinda involves us...

I'm not so sure it does. It could be a great opportunity for the world to show us the better way through their cherished "multilateralism" and "dialogue".



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLijnden From Philippines, joined Apr 2003, 564 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2031 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Who says that the nukes they claim to have are real? Didn't the Soviet Union use fake (or dummy) nukes to freak out the NATO alliance?


Be kind to animals!
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2024 times:

hmm, let them try. Exchange nukes one for one, see who runs out of targets first...


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8230 posts, RR: 23
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2004 times:

Does Kim realize what "nuclear war" means to N. Korea? There's not gunna be a whole lot of "warring" going on. North Korea will lob an estes rocket into the Bering Sea, meanwhile we'll retaliate with hundreds of land and sea based warheads which will literally remove N. Korea from the Earth instantaneously. If he's anywhere near serious about this he's far more crazy than I thought.


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineMrocktor From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1668 posts, RR: 50
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1955 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 22):
Does Kim realize what "nuclear war" means to N. Korea?

He is counting on using his nukes as a counterweight, not on actually lobbing them over the ocean. If the USA are already appeasing him now, I just can't wait till he actually has intercontinental nukes.

Besides, he can threaten his regional enemies (S. Korea, Japan etc.) and get his hands on more "aid" (which his country can't live without) with the assurance that the USA are too chickenshit to do anything unless he actually nukes the place.

mrocktor


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 968 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1944 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 1):
If we don't Iraq them, then there's no reason to get your panties in a wad.

Then what happens if a few pissed off rebels from either side blow-up some car bombs and Kim Jung thinks its U.S. Special Forces staging a preemptive attack? What happens if one of North Korea's own weapons processing facilities has an accident, and the higher-ups insist it's an outside attack?

There is ample room for the U.S. to be drug into a conflict without shooting the first shot.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 22):
Does Kim realize what "nuclear war" means to N. Korea?

He doesn't give a damn about anyone's well being, save his own ugly ass....

Quoting Slider (Reply 17):
Time to get tough with these bastards.

I suspect if our stockpiles of guided weapons, kevlar, ect were not dangerously low because of conflict in Iraq and Afganistan, we could do something. But our military options are not sufficent to really shove these dickheads back into their place.

So we just keep walking around with our tail between our legs and allow this nutcase to keep pulling strings at the expense of millions of people...


25 Centrair : The US is deeply involved in this conflict. Look at your Post-WWII history. We focused on rebuilding Japan. The Soviet goes into China and then Northe
26 Dc863 : Little boy Kimmy won't do anything. He wants to remain in power, drive his expensive cars, eat like a king, watch his movies, wear platform shoes and
27 Jacobin777 : actually the United States wouldn't be stupid enough to drop any nukes on North Korea....we have enough conventional weapons to rip them a new bungho
28 MaverickM11 : I know we're intimately involved--my question is do we have to be *now*? Wouldn't it be better to have China/South Korea/Japan solve this problem?
29 Slider : That's my fear as well, especially since we're on the hook to respond with Japan if they get into it. True enough- and I don't think anyone's disputi
30 Post contains images QXatFAT : Man, George Bush is getting a lot of ACTION in his two terms in office. Still not more ACTION then Bill Clinton though
31 Post contains images AirSpare : Maybe it's time we sent our BIG-GUN on the peace mission. Jesse Jackson, are you ready?
32 Jetjack74 : A cigar, and a pig? Beastiality is hardly action, but whatever floats the boat. What's more disturbing is the left's contentionthat we offer incentiv
33 Post contains images Greyhound : No, I'm not a war hawk and of all things I want to see in my lifetime, nuclear war is nowhere in that spectrum. However, after reading this post, the
34 HAWK21M : Is there any scope for Debate. regds MEL
35 MD11Engineer : The question is now who in North Korea has the real power. Is it Kim or are the real people in power the concrete heads of the army, who were loyal to
36 Baroque : Nice summary, but there were a "couple" of extra steps between the return from Pusan and the armistice IIRC. Something involving the return from the
37 Slider : Indeed- and Centrair touched on this rather well. It would do far more than end their economic growth--it would decimate them. Imagine taking million
38 DeltaDC9 : Pretty obvious Again, pretty obvious We have 30,000 troops there, a forward deployed carrier battle group, and boomers ready to launch, so I would th
39 MaverickM11 : I disagree. Seoul is easily within striking range of even a duct-taped North Korean Yugo-rocket. South Korea is also the first place refugees will lo
40 Baroque : You can get quite a few references to John by entering John C Ferm into Google, but alas, most hit the problem of copyright. John was a member of the
41 Boeing Nut : Yea, we all know who would win that fight. . . . . . . . no one.
42 DeltaDC9 : Here is a question, what are we in fear of NK having? A fission bomb? Surely they are not capable of a fusion bomb. If they have a few fat boys that
43 Travelin man : What I can't stand is China, Russia, and even South Korea to some extent trying to appease this @sshole. They won't even pass a resolution prohibiting
44 Post contains links PSA53 : Like every dictator, that's a sad truth. Why give aid to appease Dr.Evil?It just will be going to Jong's pocketbook.We need to apply pressure to have
45 BHXFAOTIPYYC : The only thing North Korea has that could cause the US problems is a massive porn collection. Seriously, the Great Leader gets it imported from Scanda
46 Mrmeangenes : Lijnden,the Soviets MAY have shown dummy nukes during parades, but they definitely had the real thing ...and still do: disarmament notwithstanding.
47 Sprout5199 : Why is everyone so worried about the NK threat? The US has had ICBM's for 50 years, but NK still can't get one lift off correctly. If private people h
48 DfwRevolution : Who says they must hit the U.S. to become the biggest murderers since Hitler and Stalin? Their medium and short-range missiles are more than adaquet
49 MrChips : You people missed the best post in the whole thread - instead, you continued speculating on how deep we could melt North Korea and posting pics of nu
50 Baroque : Thank goodness someone pointed this out. "Few fission bombs" dont hold a candle in that respect and I dont for a moment suppose the N Koreans think t
51 Baroque : Hooray, reality. And your Username gives me a thought for the name for the pyrrhic victory achieved by nuking N Korea - Goobye Mr Chips. Sorry just s
52 Sprout5199 : Look what happened to West Germany's economy when the east and west reunited. What do you think would happen to SK? With so many people dependent on
53 Post contains images DfwRevolution : Perhaps, but that's not how the South Koreans see it. They initiated a North-friendly policy in the mid 90s and want economic and social reunificatio
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
N. Korea Threatens War If U.S. Pressure Persists posted Wed Oct 11 2006 15:41:19 by TedTAce
Did North Korea Conduct Second Nuclear Test? posted Wed Oct 11 2006 02:00:19 by AerospaceFan
Experts Warn Of Accidental U.S.-Russia Nuclear War posted Sat Oct 7 2006 22:27:41 by AerospaceFan
Nuclear War Starting In 10 Days? posted Fri Aug 11 2006 17:57:25 by Clickhappy
Risk Of Nuclear War posted Sat Jun 17 2006 17:18:27 by Wrighbrothers
28% Of Americans Agree With A Nuclear First Strike posted Sun Jul 24 2005 03:50:50 by ACAfan
My Biggest Problem With The War In Iraq posted Mon Sep 6 2004 20:53:33 by Tbar220
Nuclear War, Ind Vs. Pak posted Sun Dec 30 2001 12:15:52 by NUAir
Man Arrested With $78,000, Nuclear Info posted Thu Nov 16 2006 19:15:02 by Jetjack74
Rumsfeld To Be Charged With War Crimes posted Fri Nov 10 2006 20:16:20 by ArtieFufkin