PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: LevelWing on November 30, 2017, 12:37:49 PM
-
It looks like Tillerson may be on his way out as Secretary of State and the current favorite to replace him is the CIA director, Mike Pompeo. It's also speculated that if that happens, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) may replace Mike Pompeo as the CIA director.
WASHINGTON — The White House has developed a plan to force out Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, whose relationship with President Trump has been strained, and replace him with Mike Pompeo, the C.I.A. director, perhaps within the next several weeks, senior administration officials said on Thursday.
Mr. Pompeo would be replaced at the C.I.A. by Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas who has been a key ally of the president on national security matters, according to the White House plan. Mr. Cotton has signaled that he would accept the job if offered, said the officials, who insisted on anonymity to discuss sensitive deliberations before decisions are announced.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/us/politics/state-department-tillerson-pompeo-trump.html
-
Jeezalou can't we get ONE PERSON from outside the effing beltway? Why not the CEO of Lockheed or something - anything but another crat.
-
Jeezalou can't we get ONE PERSON from outside the effing beltway? Why not the CEO of Lockheed or something - anything but another crat.
Tillerson is from outside the beltway. He was with Exxon Mobil for something like 40 years.
-
UH yeah - and they want to replace him with a beltway insider. Get it? Can't we have ONE GUY from outside the beltway? One guy? We have one, but we're losing him to a beltway swamp thing.
-
I would not be happy with Tillerson being pushed out.
-
I would not be happy with Tillerson being pushed out.
He was pissing off career diplomats, which is a good thing.
-
Considering it's a NYT story, I'll just wait to see what's really going on.
-
Considering it's a NYT story, I'll just wait to see what's really going on.
Here's a Daily Wire article, but it references the NYT article:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/24150/report-tillers-may-be-out-secretary-state-replaced-hank-berrien
-
Here's a Daily Wire article, but it references the NYT article:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/24150/report-tillers-may-be-out-secretary-state-replaced-hank-berrien
I don't consider the NYT and their anonymous sources as reliable news.
-
I don't consider the NYT and their anonymous sources as reliable news.
The point is that it's being reported by multiple outlets. I didn't post others because you'll just say those weren't credible, either. Besides, this is PilotSpin, where we discuss things like this routinely.
-
The point is that it's being reported by multiple outlets. I didn't post others because you'll just say those weren't credible, either. Besides, this is PilotSpin, where we discuss things like this routinely.
All of those other outlets are pointing their story to the NYT story.
I just take any MSM story citing anonymous sources with a grain of salt.
-
Tillerson was the only source of moderation in the administration. Pompeo is far more bombastic, like the President. Good for the POTUS, not so good for the rest of us (and by that I mean the residents of planet Earth).
-
Tillerson was the only source of moderation in the administration. Pompeo is far more bombastic, like the President. Good for the POTUS, not so good for the rest of us (and by that I mean the residents of planet Earth).
And that is why North Korea is able to launch and ICBM that can reach the D.C. Because we have been too patient and moderate in our dealings with them for decades.
-
And that is why North Korea is able to launch and ICBM that can reach the D.C. Because we have been too patient and moderate in our dealings with them for decades.
What's the point in escalating the NK situation? Why waste time and effort on them? Are they a threat to the US? If so, please explain. Aside from being a nasty piece of work, we have little to fear from NK. As for our good friend SK, we will not let the north move against them again. Kim knows this. Let him splash rockets in the sea, I don't want to show our capabilities against goading from a dictator of NK which has little ability to make war.
-
What's the point in escalating the NK situation? Why waste time and effort on them? Are they a threat to the US? If so, please explain. Aside from being a nasty piece of work, we have little to fear from NK. As for our good friend SK, we will not let the north move against them again. Kim knows this. Let him splash rockets in the sea, I don't want to show our capabilities against goading from a dictator of NK which has little ability to make war.
I'd say that a mad man with nuclear weapons that are likely capable of reaching anywhere in the U.S. is absolutely a threat to us.
-
. . . we have little to fear from NK.
I feel much better now that you have told me that.
In the meantime, Rocket Man is busy selling nuclear materials and engineering assistance to the highest bidder.
But there are no threats to us out there, are there?
-
I feel much better now that you have told me that.
In the meantime, Rocket Man is busy selling nuclear materials and engineering assistance to the highest bidder.
But there are no threats to us out there, are there?
Got data?
NK Kim knows the score. He might be crazy, but he's not stupid. The US sold/gave nuclear secrets(and weapons) to the Israelis, Brits, and possibly India. Are we stupid?
C'mon, be realistic. Do you think that NK will be able to reach the US with any kind of nuclear payload? If there is a threat, it's from human smuggling. Not a missile.
-
C'mon, be realistic. Do you think that NK will be able to reach the US with any kind of nuclear payload? If there is a threat, it's from human smuggling. Not a missile.
Did you not see the recent missile test?
-
Did you not see the recent missile test?
My guess is that we have about a 95% chance of shooting their missile down. If they lob more than one, the odds decrease that we will get all of them.
And even if we do hit them, what happens to the nuclear material in the bomb?
What would it mean if only one small nuke hits an American city?
But my biggest concern with their nuclear program is their selling the stuff to terrorists. They might not be stupid enough to launch against us, but I think they would definitely sell to terrorists.
-
I'd say that a mad man with nuclear weapons that are likely capable of reaching anywhere in the U.S. is absolutely a threat to us.
No indication that Kim is a mad man. He was educated in Europe and by all accounts an otherwise normal person. One who has rival relatives killed, but hey, family tiffs happen.
That said:
NK had no nuclear weapon deterrent for decades and was not invaded by SK/US. But it was maintaining a large standing army for all that time - at considerable cost. Meanwhile the people no doubt grumbled about more nylons and washing machines - a nuclear deterrent would cost them a fraction of the cost of the conventional military. No doubt the deciding factor was when they read about a similar system in the U.S. in the New York Times.
-
No indication that Kim is a mad man. He was educated in Europe and by all accounts an otherwise normal person. One who has rival relatives killed, but hey, family tiffs happen.
Since when does a European education mean a person doesn’t have a mental condition set on seeing mass destruction or inflicting pain on other humans?
North Korea has large concentration camps where he tortures and imprisons whole families including children. The large part of the NK people are starving. The atrocities of this guy rivals that of some of the cruelest dictators ever known in history.
That said:
NK had no nuclear weapon deterrent for decades and was not invaded by SK/US. But it was maintaining a large standing army for all that time - at considerable cost. Meanwhile the people no doubt grumbled about more nylons and washing machines - a nuclear deterrent would cost them a fraction of the cost of the conventional military. No doubt the deciding factor was when they read about a similar system in the U.S. in the New York Times.
WTF?
-
Did you not see the recent missile test?
What - did it reach the US? I thought it splashed down in the sea of Japan. Let me know when one is incoming to the US. I'll be sure to watch for it. We developed the capability to track every launch vehicle around the globe back when I worked on them in the late 80s. Here's a brief from just one of the publicly offered systems in place. I won't bring up the others.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/how-us-satellites-pinpointed-source-of-missile-that-shot-down-airliner/
Trust me on this - or don't, we knew the size, direction, inclination, azimuth and a bunch of other stuff within 1 minute of the launch. If it had been heading for the US, or Hawaii then other things would have been done. We can tell when they are fueling on the ground as well. The only way a launch might catch us off-guard is a sub-sea launch from the S hemisphere which doesn't have real good coverage. Strategically, that's where I would launch toward the US if I was a state actor and wanted to get away with a nuke strike on us. CA, AZ, TX, FL are all good targets from around the S Pacific near Peru.
-
What - did it reach the US? I thought it splashed down in the sea of Japan. Let me know when one is incoming to the US. I'll be sure to watch for it. We developed the capability to track every launch vehicle around the globe back when I worked on them in the late 80s. Here's a brief from just one of the publicly offered systems in place. I won't bring up the others.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/07/how-us-satellites-pinpointed-source-of-missile-that-shot-down-airliner/
Trust me on this - or don't, we knew the size, direction, inclination, azimuth and a bunch of other stuff within 1 minute of the launch. If it had been heading for the US, or Hawaii then other things would have been done. We can tell when they are fueling on the ground as well. The only way a launch might catch us off-guard is a sub-sea launch from the S hemisphere which doesn't have real good coverage. Strategically, that's where I would launch toward the US if I was a state actor and wanted to get away with a nuke strike on us. CA, AZ, TX, FL are all good targets from around the S Pacific near Peru.
The last missle launch flew at a duration and apogee that was a proof of concept that it indeed had the range and payload capability to hit the mainland US. If you were as versed in missle ballistics as you are trying to claim you would know this.
A half assed shot towards the US with a nuclear warhead would throw this world into chaos. Even if it didn’t hit the intended target a hit somewhere would release radiation into the atmosphere. Imagine that happening over Canada or the western US, or even Alaska.
-
The last missle launch flew at a duration and apogee that was a proof of concept that it indeed had the range and payload capability to hit the mainland US. If you were as versed in missle ballistics as you are trying to claim you would know this.
A half assed shot towards the US with a nuclear warhead would throw this world into chaos. Even if it didn’t hit the intended target a hit somewhere would release radiation into the atmosphere. Imagine that happening over Canada or the western US, or even Alaska.
Hmmm, I certainly know plenty about it, but if you have info on the payload onboard, would really like to know. Certainly, any air-burst would be an issue. I guess I'm relying on the fact that Kim knows for sure that any attack on the US would destroy NK completely. Nuclear brinkmanship is an interesting field of study. Kim is still on the learning curve, but he seems to have the hang of it. Sending up a nuclear payload, even if it hits in some part of the ocean might be enough to get the world powers to slap him down hard. Difficult to say.
-
Since when does a European education mean a person doesn’t have a mental condition set on seeing mass destruction or inflicting pain on other humans?
While studying in Switzerland Kim came into contact with others outside NK, allowing some third party observations of his character. As a result Wikipedia article on him states "He was described as shy, a good student who got along well with his classmates and was a basketball fan."
North Korea has large concentration camps where he tortures and imprisons whole families including children. The large part of the NK people are starving. The atrocities of this guy rivals that of some of the cruelest dictators ever known in history.
Maybe its a matter of using words differently, but I'd call all that evil. To me a mad man does things that make no sense. Those atrocities make sense once you know the goals of the perpetrators.
WTF?
Sorry - humor; I rephrased some dialog from the movie "Dr. Strangelove". In it the Russian ambassador brings up nylons and washing machines while explaining the rational motivation for the creation of their doomsday device. Well, as I see it, from the NK perspective the development of nuclear weapons are entirely rational, not madness. Besides being a deterrent against invasion or incursions they'll come in handy in taking over SK while keeping the US at bay. And they are not wrong in their analysis. They likely aren't right, either.
-
Hmmm, I certainly know plenty about it, but if you have info on the payload onboard, would really like to know. Certainly, any air-burst would be an issue. I guess I'm relying on the fact that Kim knows for sure that any attack on the US would destroy NK completely. Nuclear brinkmanship is an interesting field of study. Kim is still on the learning curve, but he seems to have the hang of it. Sending up a nuclear payload, even if it hits in some part of the ocean might be enough to get the world powers to slap him down hard. Difficult to say.
Dictators who live inside a bubble where everyone idolizes them ( or they go to the camps) become detached from reality. His regime goes day after day putting out propaganda on how Dear Leader will crush the evil Americans. They are immersed in that bullshit so much he’s beginning to believe his own bullshit. He’s just delusional enough to attempt a launch thinking he would survive the outcome.
China can stop this crap at any moment if they want. They have let him play his silly games because they know it torments the SK, the Japanese and the US. However now they have a real problem as the NK are next door to them playing with nuclear warheads. It’s always been my assumption China will intervene before anyone else does. The problem there is once they intervene now they are stuck with a country full of starving people and no resources (oil, minerals, etc).
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/rex-tillerson-is-not-leaving-role-as-secretary-state-trump-says.html
Sounds like the MSM is busy with the fake news again.
-
If NK launched nukes at us, would we not completely annihilate them? And I mean annihilate like we haven't seen for a long time. Or ever. Kim knows that. I don't think he's keen on having his body melded with the newly-glassed surface of NK.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/rex-tillerson-is-not-leaving-role-as-secretary-state-trump-says.html
Sounds like the MSM is busy with the fake news again.
Yep. Citing a media outlet such as the NYT and their anonymous sources means pretty much nothing.
-
If NK launched nukes at us, would we not completely annihilate them? And I mean annihilate like we haven't seen for a long time. Or ever. Kim knows that. I don't think he's keen on having his body melded with the newly-glassed surface of NK.
If you are dealing with a clear thinking rational human I would say yes, you are correct.
But Kim lives in a world where everyone agrees with him, everyone praises him and tells him he is wonderful. Do you think any of his advisors or his generals are willing to tell him the truth?
He has executed family members for disagreeing with him.
-
If NK launched nukes at us, would we not completely annihilate them? And I mean annihilate like we haven't seen for a long time. Or ever. Kim knows that. I don't think he's keen on having his body melded with the newly-glassed surface of NK.
Would we? With our friends the South Koreans literally next door, and 30,000 US Servicemen standing watch on the border, within fallout if not blast range? I’m not so sure we would, even if someone made an initial strike on us. I don’t know if we have the stomach for MAD any more. Most certainly not with people like Obama as president. Pretty certain we would with Trump, but he is term limited. They next guy may make Obama look like Truman.
-
If NK launched nukes at us, would we not completely annihilate them? And I mean annihilate like we haven't seen for a long time. Or ever. Kim knows that. I don't think he's keen on having his body melded with the newly-glassed surface of NK.
That is the traditional logic. And it "could" be true.
But then again, we have often been thought of as a paper tiger. Japan thought we would sue for peace after Pearl Harbor. Perhaps, they think Obama is still in the White House drawing his red lines in the sand.
Anybody that can commit the atrocities that Rocket Man has committed has something seriously short circuited in their cranial logic circuits. He may have been able to pass for normal in college, but he ain't normal.
edit to add:
Glad to see you still around Asechrest. Haven't seen much from you lately.
-
If you are dealing with a clear thinking rational human I would say yes, you are correct.
But Kim lives in a world where everyone agrees with him, everyone praises him and tells him he is wonderful. Do you think any of his advisors or his generals are willing to tell him the truth?
He has executed family members for disagreeing with him.
I get it. The dude is an incredibly evil dictator. But I think I fall toward Jim's opinion that he's not crazy in the sense that he makes irrational decisions that are fully contrary to his very evil goals. I've seen nothing to suggest he wants anything other than to remain a dictatorial evildoer in complete and total control of his country and people. A direct attack on the US would be fully contrary to that goal. Everyone knows that a direct nuclear attack on the US by NK would result in total annihilation of the latter.
-
He has executed family members for disagreeing with him.
Doing Thanksgiving dinner with him must be a party.
-
That is the traditional logic. And it "could" be true.
But then again, we have often been thought of as a paper tiger. Japan thought we would sue for peace after Pearl Harbor. Perhaps, they think Obama is still in the White House drawing his red lines in the sand.
Anybody that can commit the atrocities that Rocket Man has committed has something seriously short circuited in their cranial logic circuits. He may have been able to pass for normal in college, but he ain't normal.
edit to add:
Glad to see you still around Asechrest. Haven't seen much from you lately.
Thank you, sir. I'm in phase two of running a company after the insurance agency I worked for was acquired late 2016. 2017 was a wild ride of changes and transition, and I'm a young-ish guy trying to figure the whole exec thing out, not as an owner but as a COO-type role. It's been interesting. It doesn't leave much time for heated political debate, unfortunately.
-
That is the traditional logic. And it "could" be true.
But then again, we have often been thought of as a paper tiger.
I've read articles that point out that because of U.S. actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria wherein bin Laden, Hussein, and Gaddafi were eventually killed, Kim most definitely knows the U.S. is no paper tiger and is acting on that data. What would you do to avoid the fate of those others if you were in Kim's place and you intended to stay in power?
-
Would we? With our friends the South Koreans literally next door, and 30,000 US Servicemen standing watch on the border, within fallout if not blast range? I’m not so sure we would, even if someone made an initial strike on us. I don’t know if we have the stomach for MAD any more. Most certainly not with people like Obama as president. Pretty certain we would with Trump, but he is term limited. They next guy may make Obama look like Truman.
I guess you're probably right about the physical size restrictions with respect to a nuclear attack. Would a tac nuke strike work? Not sure. But anyway, I think a direct nuclear attack on the US is a ball game we're just not used to. God forbid it actually hit. We'd wipe those fuckers out, I promise. And I'd volunteer.
PS - What general ledger should the quarterly employer HSA contribution be posted against in an accounting system? I'm kidding, kinda'. =P
-
I've read articles that point out that because of U.S. actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria wherein bin Laden, Hussein, and Gaddafi were eventually killed, Kim most definitely knows the U.S. is no paper tiger and is acting on that data. What would you do to avoid the fate of those others if you were in Kim's place and you intended to stay in power?
I"d nuke my enemies before they nuked me. Especially if none of my generals told me NO. (since the ones that did have all been eaten by dogs).
-
I"d nuke my enemies before they nuked me. Especially if none of my generals told me NO. (since the ones that did have all been eaten by dogs).
Our single state of Texas is 6 times as large as the entirety of the country of North Korea. NK has no ability -- none -- to strike first and defeat us. We'd wipe them off the map, whether by conventional or nuclear means.
-
I’ve spent considerable time in South Korea, have many friends there. I’ve also spent time up on the DMZ and the JSA. I’ve even stood in the conference room on the NK side (with a ROK guard by the NK door).
These people know just how crazy Kim is and what he is capable of. And they wouldn’t put it past him to do something a sane person wouldn’t do.
-
A response to a nuclear attack on the US would be fast, and devastating for any opponent. Of course, we would be mindful of our neighbor to the south, and that's why our warheads have dial-a-tonnage. I don't want to get into the whole fission thing, but we can send a MIRV over and provide anything from a low of 20T(tons of TNT equiv) in a spread of 6-8 tactical locations all the way up to multi-megaton with a fusion device. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that there are subs within 2-800KM range that can level whatever they put their mind to pretty accurately.
This is no longer in service; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) But we have something similar that comes out of a 105mm howitzer or we can deliver other tactical nuclear products to level from a dozen blocks up to entire metro areas. It's been a long time since I was deployed to SK, but pretty sure right now we have tactical nukes in country. Supposedly, we don't have any in Japan due to treaty and cultural sensitivity reasons, but my guess is that if the NKs lit up the US with a nuke, or SK or Japan, then the Diet would rather quickly agree to nukes on Japan soil, rather than sitting ducks. But that last bit is just opinion of course.
-
A response to a nuclear attack on the US would be fast, and devastating for any opponent. Of course, we would be mindful of our neighbor to the south, and that's why our warheads have dial-a-tonnage. I don't want to get into the whole fission thing, but we can send a MIRV over and provide anything from a low of 20T(tons of TNT equiv) in a spread of 6-8 tactical locations all the way up to multi-megaton with a fusion device. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that there are subs within 2-800KM range that can level whatever they put their mind to pretty accurately.
This is no longer in service; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) But we have something similar that comes out of a 105mm howitzer or we can deliver other tactical nuclear products to level from a dozen blocks up to entire metro areas. It's been a long time since I was deployed to SK, but pretty sure right now we have tactical nukes in country. Supposedly, we don't have any in Japan due to treaty and cultural sensitivity reasons, but my guess is that if the NKs lit up the US with a nuke, or SK or Japan, then the Diet would rather quickly agree to nukes on Japan soil, rather than sitting ducks. But that last bit is just opinion of course.
Yeah, but by then it would be too late.
-
Whelp, that's sort of one of those 'it depends' arguments. If the 'dear leader' can make it to - oh, lets say Philly, or a bit further south to Baltimore and deliver a few KT I think it might be worth it. Also, despite Boeing which would be a modest loss, I could do without most of Seattle.
No offence to the good folk of Philly, Baltimore or Seattle of course. I would mourn the citizens for a few hours. As long as we got NK out of the deal.
-
Kim Jun Un is neither crazy nor irrational. As others have wisely pointed out, he has invested heavily in nuclear weaponry to keep us at bay. His motivation is to keep himself and his dynasty in power. He isn’t likely to stage a first strike on us, since he knows his dynasty would be destroyed in the aftermath.
I could see a nuclear strike on us as a last desperate measure after the territorial integrity of North Korea wa abrogated due to an invasion. Easiest way to forestall that is to not invade.
Unfortunately, the bombastic verbiage from Hair Fuerer is just making things worse. It allows Kim Jun Il to truthfully paint himself as standing firm against a foreign aggressor. This will do nothing but endear him to his followers.
I am amazed he can keep power though. A soldier who recently defected from there (he had to evade a fullisade of gunfire to do it) has malnutrition and was full of intestinal worms. If this is the state of the soldiery things are far worse than I could of imagined. The first rule of dictatorship is you kept the soldiers well fed, well paid, and happy.
-
Kim Jun Un is neither crazy nor irrational. As others have wisely pointed out, he has invested heavily in nuclear weaponry to keep us at bay. His motivation is to keep himself and his dynasty in power. He isn’t likely to stage a first strike on us, since he knows his dynasty would be destroyed in the aftermath.
I could see a nuclear strike on us as a last desperate measure after the territorial integrity of North Korea wa abrogated due to an invasion. Easiest way to forestall that is to not invade.
Unfortunately, the bombastic verbiage from Hair Fuerer is just making things worse. It allows Kim Jun Il to truthfully paint himself as standing firm against a foreign aggressor. This will do nothing but endear him to his followers.
I am amazed he can keep power though. A soldier who recently defected from there (he had to evade a fullisade of gunfire to do it) has malnutrition and was full of intestinal worms. If this is the state of the soldiery things are far worse than I could of imagined. The first rule of dictatorship is you kept the soldiers well fed, well paid, and happy.
I would expect a alt left progressive to come out in defense of a murderous dictator of a communist country and you certainly don't disappoint in that regards. And in your endorsement of said dictator you of course have to take a swipe at the President of our country.
You don't have a fucking clue as to what your blabbering about, which is nothing more than the bullshit being bantered around the faculty lounge. Anyone who has read and studied the Korean Peninsula going back pre WW2 can understand what is going on there, and it's not lil Kim defending his homeland against the rogue Americans (which, btw, is a major theme of NK propaganda).
You defend a dictator who has murdered his own people in the thousands, subjects people, entire families including children to concentration camps and even murders his own family members if they dare disagree with him. You defend a dictator who is starving his nation by spending huge sums to prop up a military. You defend a dictator who wouldn't think twice about trying to over run a free democracy to his south and murder millions of their citizens in the process.
Perhaps you should go over to South Korea and lecture them on how your pal Kim is only defending himself against them and their American friends. It would be amusing watching them tear you a new asshole.
-
And you display the limits of your reading comprehension. I would never knowingly defend a despot like the North Korean Dictator, or as he might be more realitically labeled, their king. True dictatorships are usually not dynastic in the modern age.
I was trying to illustrate his motivations in his actions. Wisdom is the ability to see things past the lens of your own experience. If you understand something about the other guy you’re likely to make better decisions. Super Fragile Ego Extra Braggadocious has gotten rid of a great many of the people in the State department who really understood the other guys. We are collectively the poorer for it.
You prefer the blunderings of your Bigot in Chief, since in your eyes he can do no wrong. I prefer someone who thinks carefully about what’s going on before spouting off their big gob.
-
And you display the limits of your reading comprehension. I would never knowingly defend a despot like the North Korean Dictator, or as he might be more realitically labeled, their king. True dictatorships are usually not dynastic in the modern age.
I was trying to illustrate his motivations in his actions. Wisdom is the ability to see things past the lens of your own experience. If you understand something about the other guy you’re likely to make better decisions. Super Fragile Ego Extra Braggadocious has gotten rid of a great many of the people in the State department who really understood the other guys. We are collectively the poorer for it.
You prefer the blunderings of your Bigot in Chief, since in your eyes he can do no wrong. I prefer someone who thinks carefully about what’s going on before spouting off their big gob.
I understand you like communist dictators and in your post you attempted to justify his actions as defense of his country, which is laughable.
You've never sat foot on the Korean Peninsula and have obviously never cracked a book open on the subject, yet you use faculty lounge bullshit and try to cloak it as knowledge.
The North Koreans are not concerned about the SK’s storming the DMZ and launching an attack of the north. The South Koreans have long wanted a peaceful unification without bloodshed because they realize those in the north are their relatives.
However there have been many attempts of the North to build tunnels that they could move thousands of troops through rapidly into the south. That doesn’t sound like the North is worried about security. The majority of incursions on the DMZ have been the North as aggressors. The North has continually stated all of Korea is theirs and they are willing to take it back at any cost.
And why does Kim hate America? Because the Americans fought along side the South to prevent the North from taking over and successfully pushed the North back. And the Americans have protected the south from aggression.
On the current affairs of the State Dept you are mindlessly spouting off talking points and once again clueless to what has really happened.
Those dismissals at the SD are of useless beauracrats, many which are embedded Obama sychophants who are only interested in pushing a failed policy. And frankly is time to clean house at multiple agencies since the Chocolate Commie filled them with useless people.
-
Kim Jun Un is neither crazy nor irrational. As others have wisely pointed out, he has invested heavily in nuclear weaponry to keep us at bay. His motivation is to keep himself and his dynasty in power. He isn’t likely to stage a first strike on us, since he knows his dynasty would be destroyed in the aftermath.
Yeah - um, no. One does not need ICBMs to defend oneself from invasion. And they are less than useless in an attack from an aggressor because they become a justifiable target, as well as a cultural lightning rod('we attacked xyz nation because we don't trust them with the nuclear weapons") for aggression. This is what Kim says about the US, that he can't trust us with nukes, therefore he needs rockets with nukes as a first strike just in case.
-
I get it. The dude is an incredibly evil dictator. But I think I fall toward Jim's opinion that he's not crazy in the sense that he makes irrational decisions that are fully contrary to his very evil goals. I've seen nothing to suggest he wants anything other than to remain a dictatorial evildoer in complete and total control of his country and people. A direct attack on the US would be fully contrary to that goal. Everyone knows that a direct nuclear attack on the US by NK would result in total annihilation of the latter.
No, don't believe Kim is 'crazy". In addition to the points you raised, Kim also needs an enemy. We are perfectly suited for that and he uses it to his advantage. Fear is pretty powerful, so as long as he uses us as the means to keep the populace in dread of being attacked by the US, he consoles his power.
Wonder if the solution isn't just the opposite from what we are doing. Drop all the sanctions, encourage trade with other countries and bring them into the world such that the general populace sees just what the rest of the world is like, not just Kim's picture of it.
Believe it will be impossible to remove nukes from N. Korea.
-
I've always considered that about 90% or more of the vitriol from Kim is for internal consumption. Also as a way of deflecting the conditions in his own country as being so messed up - he will always need to point to another outside agent for the travails.
-
Michael, some feedback.
What I remember about your post at the top of this page is Michael took advantage of an opportunity to address his opposition and said blah, blah, Trump sucks, he is a braggard and I am a hater.
This is the message I got from your wisdom, one opinion and two facts. Is this how you intended to be read? Do you recognize the image of yourself that it gives?
BTW, we already know the President brags. I mean, nobody brags as well as he does, nobody is as good at it as he is. There isn't even a second place, you're gonna see, no one can pop off the self-aggrandizement like Trump can.
Self assessment - were you effective at what you intended to convey?
-
And you display the limits of your reading comprehension. I would never knowingly defend a despot like the North Korean Dictator, or as he might be more realitically labeled, their king. True dictatorships are usually not dynastic in the modern age.
I was trying to illustrate his motivations in his actions. Wisdom is the ability to see things past the lens of your own experience. If you understand something about the other guy you’re likely to make better decisions. Super Fragile Ego Extra Braggadocious has gotten rid of a great many of the people in the State department who really understood the other guys. We are collectively the poorer for it.
You prefer the blunderings of your Bigot in Chief, since in your eyes he can do no wrong. I prefer someone who thinks carefully about what’s going on before spouting off their big gob.
As Ronald Reagan noted, you liberals are so profoundly good at providing proof that you know very little and brag about your make believe intelligence so much.
Too bad none of your MMGW claims ever pan out, or your arrogant hatred of those who choose to ignore your self described brilliance ever seems to dry up.
Academic liberal progressives are the worst of a bad lot of loud mouthed, uninformed, childish, egomaniacs. In second place are the feminists, but they far outdo you clowns in their delusions of oppression. You have a lot 8f ground to make up there.
-
I get it. The dude is an incredibly evil dictator. But I think I fall toward Jim's opinion that he's not crazy in the sense that he makes irrational decisions that are fully contrary to his very evil goals. I've seen nothing to suggest he wants anything other than to remain a dictatorial evildoer in complete and total control of his country and people. A direct attack on the US would be fully contrary to that goal. Everyone knows that a direct nuclear attack on the US by NK would result in total annihilation of the latter.
Dictators want to simply be in complete and total control of his country and people, only until that no longer satisfies them.
They then wish to expand their sphere of influence, either for protection or for ideological purposes. I certainly think the fat Kim has his sights set on reunifying the Korean Peninsula, even if it means walking atop of the bodies of their southern neighbors.
It made no sense for Japan to attack the US. Yet they nevertheless did. It made no sense for Germany to think it could conquer Russia, but it nevertheless tried.
I can’t take any comfort in predicting the limits of a delusional dictator.
-
I guess you're probably right about the physical size restrictions with respect to a nuclear attack. Would a tac nuke strike work? Not sure. But anyway, I think a direct nuclear attack on the US is a ball game we're just not used to. God forbid it actually hit. We'd wipe those fuckers out, I promise. And I'd volunteer.
PS - What general ledger should the quarterly employer HSA contribution be posted against in an accounting system? I'm kidding, kinda'. =P
Ha! I’m a tax guy now. That’s an accounting question. (But if I recall there’s only one general ledger, thus the word “general.”).
Accountants is smart!
-
Our single state of Texas is 6 times as large as the entirety of the country of North Korea. NK has no ability -- none -- to strike first and defeat us. We'd wipe them off the map, whether by conventional or nuclear means.
Are you saying a tiny sliver of a country like Israel is powerless to defeat a geographically larger nuclear-capable opponent?
Obama called ISIS the JV Team. Not too smart to underestimate the determination of a lesser foe.