WAR! "North Korea's foreign minister said on Monday that U.S. President Donald Trump had declared war on North Korea and that Pyongyang reserves the right to take countermeasures, including shooting down U.S. strategic bombers even if they are not in the country's air space." This is getting nuts.
The fuck else would they do? Trump makes open threats while our bombers buzz their airspace. The next flight mission may not come back whole. Who's the lucky martyr?
Them ascribing a declaration of war from someone else who hasn't actually declared war isn't the same as Trump saying that we declare war and getting a congressional declaration. It's still just stupid rhetorical escalation until someone fires the first shot. If they attempt to shoot down one of our planes and actually do it, there won't be a North Korea anymore.
The fuck else would they do? Trump makes open threats while our bombers buzz their airspace. The next flight mission may not come back whole. Who's the lucky martyr Probably won't be a South Korea anymore either but hey, omelettes.
And if they can shoot down a Northrop B-2 Spirit (our strategic bomber line), they deserve to. It can fire 16 untraceable nuclear warheads at North Korea each with a yield larger than Hiroshima while flying off the coast of Hawaii.
Ahem, cough cough USS Pueblo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Pueblo_(AGER-2) Part of me thinks..."I pity the foo...." Part of me thinks our President is getting played into legitimatizing the regime and it's fears. As if there's moral high ground to be had in "they shot first". Not to get all conspiritard on you, but I wonder if Russia or China is goading NK into a confrontation, knowing it will weaken Trump's administration, US relations with the Phillippines, Japan, SK and other regional players and the US position in general. Trump seems all about giving up on "soft power", and with forces committed in Afghanistan (hmm, an unwinnable war that serves no purpose and has no strategic value...sensing a pattern here), an engagement in NK seems guaranteed to bog us down in a conflict that will only drain resources, without ever resulting in a win, anything of strategic value, or peace in that region. We are less capable of opposing Russian or Chinese aggression if we are engaged with the nation-state equivalent of Ray Rice's mouthy girlfriend.
Wasn't one of the lines from Hawks that if we wanted to end that type of war quickly, we could, but the collateral damage for loss of civilians is always troubling? The questioning and political blowback to the President is too hard to handle. But, Trump has shown he couldn't give a rat's ass what the media or most of the public thinks about him. So, if the Joint Chiefs or military strategists bring him something that says, "we can move in a few troops and half-ass it from the air for 5 years with limited civilian casualties and a cost of $500 billion dollars OR we can move in no troops, bomb them into submission for 6 weeks, but probably lose a lot of civilians at a cost of $50 billion dollars" I feel like he'd take the second choice and move on to the next tweet.
To some degree I see your point from a Russian perspective. The further we spread ourselves elsewhere, the more they like it as it allows them greater latitude in Eastern Europe. It is harder to believe this is something China really would want. We already have bases in SK, Japan, Thailand, soon again in the PI, Australia, and Afghanistan. I really can't see China being thrilled with boots on the ground somewhere else abutting their borders. Also consider, NK shares a land border with Russia as well......though small, I'm sure Russia isn't ecstatic about that either.
I'm sure we could commit the equivalent of genocide quickly and cheaply, but to what end? My comment is more on par with: What does winning a war in Afghanistan (or for that matter, NK) look like? What does it get us? How does it leave us stronger, more secure and how does it justify the human, opportunity and economic costs? Why do it? I get combating an aggressive China or a destabilizing Russia, because at least that gets us somewhere better from a (debatable) geopolitical perspective. I hate to sound trite, but there's no oil or gold to find in these places, nor is there an ideology worth opposing. So, why the fuck bother? I can't realistically agree that NK is an existential threat to any domestic interest. I also think the military is one thing Trump does not lightly fuck with. Mattis is not without merit (although I think he was appointed on the merit of his infamous quote), and Trump will talk shit, but in true bully fashion, I don't think he wants to be held accountable for the violence, death and destruction. I also sincerely doubt he can garner support for a large-scale engagement outside of his now-deeply-regretted expansion powers (granted to Bush in the post-9/11 shit storm).
Sure there is. They have one of the largest precious mineral deposits on Earth. But to your original point,I agree. But the second they take an actual shot at SK, or Japan or US, then it absolutely becomes a threat worth fighting against.
As has been stated, if they get missiles that can reach the continental US they'll constantly be making demands, holding people hostage, and threatening to launch if we/other countries don't give them what they want. For all of you that are so adamantly against a conflict with North Korea, I assume you just think they'll never reach that capability. I don't share your confidence, but I don't see how someone could think "Nah, North Korea would never do to that." It would be shocking if that wasn't how they used that kind of military power. I don't really see the parallels to Afghanistan. I don't think the norks are going to fight on indefinitely like religious fanatics. No one can predict a war, but the far bigger problem would be how China reacts, in my opinion.
Are you familiar with the first war we entered with Korea? It’s not like there is no history about what they will do.
That was almost 70 years ago back when China had a very limited interest in global economics. I don't know how they'll react. I doubt they'd be interested in another conflict against the United States on that scale, but yes, in the near future it's hard to envision them not giving a serious rebuttal to such an invasion, militarily or otherwise. Of course the North Korean army was totally routed within a few weeks, and I would expect a similar result pending how more significant players react.
NCAA coaches charged with corruption? Who would of ever suspected such a thing? http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...asketball-coaches-10-charged-fraud-corruption
Of course they need to make a little walking around money on the side. It's not like they're the highest paid public sector employees in Western Civilization or anything.
A follow up. Today the alderman were presented with a resolution to honor the St. Louis PD for the long hours they've been putting in due to the protests. They declined to vote on it and a motion was made to send it to a committee. They had no problem honoring a felon drug dealer, but when it comes to honoring the police they take a pass. No wonder St. Louis is annually one of the shittiest places to live in the country. Perhaps the PD should take a pass too and just move on to greener and friendlier pastures.
Mass shooting in Las Vegas. Appears coordinated, with multiple shooters and automatic weapons. Situation still ongoing at present. Edit: Revised to say single shooter, Stephen Paddock of Mesquite Nevada.
Cops had to use explosives to gain entry so he had the door barricaded, he also had time to reload multiple times according to what I've read.