Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
So this looks like it's happening
I don't understand this pre-emptive strike zero sum game thinking. Wasn't this tried with the Soviet Union in the Cold War? Wasn't the conclusion that pre-emptively striking someone just causes that person to lash out and not the desired effect of pushing back from the table and honourably negotiating a truce and accepting a loss?
Mike Pence is in Seoul this coming weekend so I doubt they'd want to start their pre-emptive strike before that.
I remember in a 60 Minutes episode a month or two ago they showed some general that transferred over from the Iraq or Afghanistan front getting the US troops ready. He said they had all the targets in North Korea sighted so it's just a matter of pressing a button. Of course, the North Koreans have their artillery and rockets all aimed too including the urban centres of South Korea.
Pre-emptive strikes are completely rational against an irrational foe, particularly one led by a sociopath/mad man or one taking orders from a supernatural deity with an insatiable appetite.
Yeah, that has worked well in Iraq.
Foe? Really ? Axis of evil claptrap here.
Oh, and what if the one doing the striking is guilty of aforementioned: Blair/Bush/ Trump (No child of God nonsense...)
It is not necessarily the spoils of an ultimate conquest, but the perpetual activity of global war that rakes in the profits. That is the definition of war profiteering LelandJ had in mind, I believe.Profiteering? What is there to profit from a war with North Korea? Aren't they broke? With Iraq there was the allure of oil. Afghanistan offered opium. Libya - oil, Gaddafi's women and his golden gun, but North Korea would offer the US and its coalition of the willing...? More coal that most of us are trying to stop using?
The only profiteering I can see is we fired off 1000 cruise missiles, used our missile shield, 50 tactical nuclear weapons, and burnt 1m litres of jet fuel so Raytheon, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Exxon please process the next purchase order. Perhaps in the collateral fallout, the Samsung headquarters will be damaged so Apple can sell more iPhones because the Galaxy S8 isn't hitting the market in force. America First.
Also - the "forthcoming" war with North Korea is terminologically incorrect as we are already technically at war with them. The current state of affairs is a truce - there was no armistice signed after the Korean War.
So I guess Trump doesn't need Congressional approval to "declare" war on the Norks - he can just resume hostilities?
If you are advocating we bomb the globalist Vatican on Easter, I gotta say, you've got style.Pre-emptive strikes are completely rational against an irrational foe, particularly one led by a sociopath/mad man or one taking orders from a supernatural deity with an insatiable appetite.
We like to feel important on the international stage - even though no one even knows where we are.2003 Iraq? Does North Korea want to tempt that? Shock and awe baby, shock and awe.
That said I'm still not sure why the Australians are in the story. Honestly, isn't the distance for a missile with a nuclear warhead to Alaska and Seattle shorter than to the eastern part of the Australian continent?
There's a lot I don't know about that region, but NK's DMZ is supposedly the greatest concentration of a military on this our Earth. That includes a big, big minefield. Also, Kim keeps his daddy's tinydong missiles and big guns out in the open to impress his peasants and instill "readiness."
This is called Operation: taking advantage of a severely retarded child living a fairy tale. Sure, if Kim wanted first-strike, or to meet one in glorious battle, massing your munitions and millions of shittily equipped peasants at the river is good - in 1817. I don't see this becoming a Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq 2. Instead, this war is actually stacked in our favor to finish.
Now, China? I don't know. I don't suspect they'll interfere, but they may protest. The only reasons I say so are 1) this isn't Mao's China, they have no ideological kinship with NK anymore 2) China actually wants some regional stability, and it will throw NK to the wolves, just to achieve this. I'm also willing to bet SK is currently China's favored trade partner of the two, seeing as all they get from NK is coal and liability.
If SK takes the north, all the better, as they'll be the ones with a refugee crisis on their hands, and who knows if the peasants could actually be fed? Not to mention, you have all these medieval, stupid, unskilled masses - now what? It'd make shit lots easier for SK, if Kim orders his people be shot as he vainly tries to withdraw. It'll hurt SK to unite the peninsula, even if its for the best they do, so I think President Xi and his government in Bejing will be pleased.
I've only read article four: