Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 52

Thread: North Korea-

  1. #1

    Default North Korea-

    North Korea has been a busy country. Under Kim Jong Un's dictatorship, the country has recently tested a nuclear weapon, fired a ballistic missile over Japan, and has made threats against the US and its allies.

    In response, the US is negotiating sanctions with its partners, including China, which could prohibit items and oil from entering or leaving North Korea.

    With two volatile leaders in the the US and NK, there have been concerns of a potential war.

    Although the situation is tense, I tend to think the chances of a full war are still minimal. I do not think that Kim Jong Un is a clinically diagnosed lunatic, in spite of the rhetoric. I think his interests are in self-preservation and he does not want to lose the most hateful dictatorship in existence, which is likely why he has pushed for the development of nuclear weapons.

    I'm not saying that Jong Un is NOT a lunitic and that war can't possibly happen, I just think he is using the threat of nuclear war to subdue foreign intervention in its brutal regime, and he leverages the international responses to its actions as propaganda to his people to convince them that the outside world wants to destroy them.

    For these reasons, I think Jong Un will continue developing weapons and broadcasting the tests while forcing the rest of the world to negotiate, which it has been doing for decades. I don't see much chance of him waking up in the morning and deciding to end a US city, and therefore, his own country.

    On the other hand, it's been reported that NK has a 100 kilotron warhead, so allowing such a threat to exist raises the significant possiblity that NK may have the capacity to attack and take out a city.

    China wants to maintain a long leash on NK to scare the US, South Korea and Japan into making concessions. The leaders in SK and Japan have been changing their positions , with more support for the US to again deploy nuclear weapons in the region. Meanwhile, China has been trying to prevent the US returning its nuclear weapons to the region, promoting the idea of a "nuclear-free Korean peninsula." This is hypocrisy since the Chinese regime maintains its own nuclear stockpiles and it has assisted NK in developing its nuclear weapons.

    Considering the temperament of our world leaders, and North Korea's relentless pursuit of the development of nuclear weapons, what are the chances that this will escalate into a bloody war?

    Is war inevitable? Is it necessary? What are the options to end this conflict between Kim Jong Un and the world?
    Last edited by Starrunner; 08-Sep-2017 at 23:25.

  2. #2


    I believe you're mostly right. Un is insane, but he isn't stupid. He knows if he goes far enough the UN alone will end his regime.

    But at the same time the international community can't just let Un build up a nuclear arsenal. I wouldn't be surprised if we start a war with North Korea first by trying that decapitation strike. And that's probably just because of our current moron in chief would justify it as some sort of war equals jobs scheme.

  3. #3


    Just as a philosophical pursuit alone... I've compared this with the US Constitution's, right to bear arms and - the much more recent provisos on mental and legal capacity, of said 'rights'... Whether there's any actual global equivalence of this right to bear arms and; the considerations for limits on type and quantity of arms...

    It seems reasonable at face value that, in order to properly defend one's-self; the level of defense would require equal or greater, threat and, force... Yet, this seeming laws of physics comparison - doesn't appear to take into consideration, the human-factor... Yet, just as the proliferation in legal and illegal weapons in the USA... a practical reduction (never-mind elimination), looks highly improbable...

    It would take nearly if not every nation, in unity (just as it would take nearly if not every US citizen, in unity)... to step back and eliminate the existence of these irrevocably destructive means... It quite literally is currently overkill...

    So, would any nation or it's leader deliberately set off it's nukes - knowing that total self-destruction is highly likely? I'd like to think not yet, that is hardly any assurance to me and, undoubtedly is no assurance to anyone else...

    The next seemingly logical step available - would be to hold the status-quo and; hope, that accidental discharge or, rogue zealot groups or, some completely psychologically corrupt sorts - don't, set off any nukes irrespective of conventional reasoning...

    It seems that Pandora's box has been opened...

    The consideration towards an advanced strike on the DPRK - appears to be just as risky and, certainly an absolute provocation likely, to assure starting, rather than stopping anything...

    It may, go a bit further if, we banned the Twit from twitter (or any other sort of social media)...
    Doomsday Clock

    ...the Clock represents an analogy for the threat of global nuclear war. Since 2007, it has also reflected climate change[2] and new developments in the life sciences and technology that could inflict irrevocable harm to humanity.[3]
    As has been said... it's really quite astonishing, that we've made it this far - the faux-pas of human behavior along with the hiccups in the technology and, not of least importance - the vulnerabilities to criminal and nefarious entities... Oh, and natural disaster, too!

    The Clock represents the hypothetical global catastrophe as "midnight" and The Bulletin's opinion on how close the world is to a global catastrophe as a number of "minutes" to midnight. Its original setting in 1947 was seven minutes to midnight. It has been set backward and forward 22 times since then, the smallest-ever number of minutes to midnight being two (in 1953) and the largest seventeen (in 1991). As of January 2017, the Clock is set at two and a half minutes to midnight, due to a "rise of 'strident nationalism' worldwide, United States President Donald Trump's comments over North Korea, Russia, and nuclear weapons."[4][5] This setting is the Clock's second-closest approach to midnight since its introduction.

  4. #4


    Well, call me flippant, but I'm not sitting around worrying about if we all get blown up. Nothing I can do about it, so I figure there's better things to fuss over.

  5. #5


    Quote Originally Posted by KimbaWolfNagihiko View Post
    Well, call me flippant, but I'm not sitting around worrying about if we all get blown up. Nothing I can do about it, so I figure there's better things to fuss over.
    I sort of agree. This is a "miniscule" individual that is getting the notoriety he is seeking. The United Nations needs to inforce the sanctions, the US needs to look ready to act but that is it, and China and Russia need to get Un to calm down.

    I am still attempting to see where this "vicious circle" actually started.

    I would be more worried about some other things that are not getting the attention that may become bigger disasters in the next 5 years.

  6. #6


    Quote Originally Posted by KimbaWolfNagihiko View Post
    Well, call me flippant, but I'm not sitting around worrying about if we all get blown up. Nothing I can do about it, so I figure there's better things to fuss over.
    When good people do nothing they let evil people win.

  7. #7


    Quote Originally Posted by Slomo View Post
    When good people do nothing they let evil people win.
    My plans for tomorrow: fly to North Korea and stop the crazy dictator from doing crazy things!

    Nah, I'm gonna sit around in my footie pajamas and diaper and watch anime. \_(ツ)_/

  8. #8


    Quote Originally Posted by KimbaWolfNagihiko View Post
    Well, call me flippant, but I'm not sitting around worrying about if we all get blown up. Nothing I can do about it, so I figure there's better things to fuss over.
    Okay - "You're flippant!" *wink-wink*

    If it does happen... ya'know, global thermal nuclear war... I want it to be a complete surprise, to me... sitting here with my coffee, hugging my dog and, replying to some irritant on ADISC...(I know you are but, what am I?) blam-whoosh! bye-bye...

    Woopsies! everybody go boom! Beyond a nanosecond (give or take), I don't see it as something I'd want to survive - never-minding those that, may rather I didn't survive - could you imagine, coming out of your lead-lined, concrete-bunker, Chef Boyardee, smeared down your face - then it hits you... you forgot to pack a 1000-years of diapers into your bunker

    Quote Originally Posted by Slomo View Post
    When good people do nothing they let evil people win.
    Mostly, I don't believe that there are good or bad people... rather average, really...
    The trouble is... when anyone does something, thinking it's good... and, it all blows-up in their face... that's a real bummer!

  9. #9


    N. Korea and Un strikes me as The Mouse that Roared. The thing about having nuclear weapons is that you can't use them unless you want your country utterly destroyed. Is Kim Jon Un that insane? Maybe, but I don't think his generals are.

    The best deterrent is to place anti-missiles in S. Korea and a few more in Japan. The best time to knock out a intercontinental ballistic missile is when it's first taking off before the primary stage breaks loose from the second, or so said The Washington Post, because it hasn't yet gained speed. It would be interesting if we did this the next time N. Korea had another launch, but I think that's legally considered an act of war. But firing a missile over Japan seemed like an act of war to me.

  10. #10


    Oh, whatever we do! Do NOT start a war with North Korea! Do NOT start a nuclear war with North Korea!

    I'm FAR more worried that Trump is going to launch a pre-emptive strike on North Korea because he does nothing but binge-watch Fox News all day, which has on people like Ralph Peters, who just recently wrote a horrendous opinion piece in the New York Post, where he advocates for essentially, creating a nuclear holocaust. He literally said, first thing in the article, "Better a million dead North Koreans than a thousand dead Americans". Hey jackass! Nice false choice you set up there! Kim Jong Un may be crazy and evil, but he's not a moron. He's not going to just blindly attack the U.S! He knows how that will end up for him! If we attack, then we not only have a million dead North Koreans, but also thousands of dead Americans. Not to mention millions of dead South Koreans, since if we attack North Korea, Kim Jong Un immediately fires on Seoul, South Korea. And also thousands of dead Japanese people. They do have the capacity to attack Japan, and most likely will if we attack them first. We don't have to choose between a million dead North Koreans and a thousand dead Americans. He claims that he doesn't want this war (You're lying through your teeth. You god damn want that war!), and then goes onto mock what he calls, "the intellectual elite" for insisting that all human life is precious, not just our deplorable American lives.

    YOU'RE GOD DAMN RIGHT WE'RE INSISTING THAT RALPH PETERS! And as you've proven in this pathetic excuse you call an article, it's perfectly clear that you don't think that. It's perfectly clear that you think "Meh. So millions of Koreans, and thousands more Japanese will die in this war that I'm so eagerly lobbying for. But fuck em. They're just Koreans and Japanese. You evil, sadistic, war-mongering, bloodthirsty, rancid, piece of shit, loathsome, monster. Go fuck yourself Ralph Peters.

    Sadly, it's not just him saying that. Plenty of other deplorable Neo-Cons have made this argument many times. I know Sen. Lindsey Graham (who primarily gets his campaign money from defense contractors, and has never met a war he didn't like) went on FOX a couple weeks ago, and pretty much made the exact same argument. Nearly all the Neo-Cons are making this argument, I know a couple of FOX hosts laughed at the idea of diplomacy and equated it to Unicorns and Hugs, and they've made this exact argument in the past. Remember Condoleeza Rice lobbying for the Iraq War, by saying about Saddam having WMDs "I don't the smoking gun to be in the form of a mushroom cloud"? Yeah. They're doing it again. How'd that Iraq War turn out?

    I'm terrified of Trump hearing these people, and then going "Yeah. These bloodthirsty NeoCons are right. We gotta get 'em over there before they get us over here. Nuke em" and then drops a nuclear weapon on Pyongyang as a pre-emptive strike. All fears I have about North Korea are fears that our dumbass war-mongering government will start a war with North Korea. Not that North Korea is going to attack us. I don't believe for a second that North Korea can hit anywhere in the U.S, except maybe the Aleutian Islands in Alaska, which aren't even really populated. Not to mention, the primary reason Kim Jong Un is obtaining these weapons is as a deterrent so we DON'T attack them.

    Yeah. Perhaps we should work with China and Russia to get Kim Jong Un to stop this, or have them put sanctions on North Korea since any sanctions that don't directly hit Kim Jong Un aren't gonna be effective. But whatever we do. No matter what. Do NOT attack North Korea with a pre-emptive strike. DO NOT DO THAT!!! NO!!! JUST NO!!!

Similar Threads

  1. If North Korea Launched a missle
    By MagicMeow in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 18-Jun-2017, 06:41
  2. North Korea
    By BabyEddie in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-Nov-2012, 19:49
  3. North Korea and Iran
    By TheFoxxehAssassin in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 19-Jul-2010, 22:30
  4. North Korea launches two more missiles
    By mm3 in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 24-Jul-2009, 20:03
  5. North Korea
    By ShippoFox in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-Jun-2009, 01:54

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  • - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community. is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.