By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Would you agree on a pre-emptive strike against North Korea?

 

A pre-emptive strike against North Korea?

Avoid loss of human lives at all costs! 128 28.64%
 
NK will never use those w... 147 32.89%
 
We should stop them befor... 71 15.88%
 
We should stop NK before NK causes a tragedy. 101 22.60%
 
Total:447
Soundwave on 05 September 2017
WolfpackN64 said:
The weapons they make are for defensive purposes. It's clear they just want to take part in the MAD doctrine. Once they have nuclear bombs, no one will dare to strike them first.

A pre-emptive strike against North Korea will prove the regime correct and it might even turn South Korea away from the USA, remind you, many people still have family across the border and they're still all Korean.

Agreed. South Korea (or what's left of it) would tell the US to get the fuck out and take their military bases with them. China would insist that the "free" North Korea become an effective Chinese vassal state. 



Around the Network
Wyrdness on 05 September 2017
Azuren said:

So we should sit on our thumbs and wait for the first move. Okay. 

With nukes in play that's your only choice other than to try and bring them to the negotiation table.



Wyrdness on 05 September 2017
DialgaMarine said:

 At this point, I would not be surprised if China's stance, on taking NK's side if we attack first, is just a bluff in itself. China is so heavily tied to us, whereas NK has become nothing more a debt to them. I believe that's just their way of trying to prevent NK from detonating a warhead so close their border, but if we attacked first, I think China would hang back. 

That being said though, I still disagree with a preemptive strike. NK has been blowing smoke up our asses since the cease-fire was signed. This is nothing new. They know the second they harm a hair on either us or our allies that they're done. 

The thing is like someone said before China don't want a US puppet state on their door step which gives the US military a closer vantage point, China also aren't as reliant on western trade as many here think as the Country is heavily involved in developing African countries and trade over there where they get a mass amount of resources from helping the development.



Wyrdness on 05 September 2017
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Soundwave said:

South Korea and Japan are huge economies

I don't get it. I thought South Korea was super un-important but apparently Seoul is one of the most populated cities ever? That's crazy. Never even heard of it.

Seoul is around 6th in the global power city index and global finance index, we'd be quite buggered if something happened there mate as it would be like a sink hole opened up and swallowed a tonne of the world's money.



NATO on 05 September 2017

 

 



Around the Network
3sexty on 05 September 2017

Against their moron leader...Yes indeed. Shoot first I say!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Xbox 360 and Xbox One

Gamertag:  GamertagOz70

Azuren on 06 September 2017
Wyrdness said:
Azuren said:

So we should sit on our thumbs and wait for the first move. Okay. 

With nukes in play that's your only choice other than to try and bring them to the negotiation table.

It's actually not. A blitzkrieg could topple NK before they have a chance to launch anything.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Azuren on 07 September 2017
Hiku said:
Azuren said:

It's actually not. A blitzkrieg could topple NK before they have a chance to launch anything.

As I mentioned in my post above, North Korea have a massive amount of conventional weapons in place aimed at South Korea for this exact purpose. To retaliate against South Korea in the event of a pre emptive strike. They're holding South Korea hostage with conventional weapons, and their plan is to upgrade to nukes so they can hold Japan and USA hostage in a similar fasion.

Then we either lose SK... Or SK, Japan, and the US? Sounds like a pretty easy choice. We obviously don't want Kim Dong Un doing anything to SK, but we also don't want him doing anything to Japan or us. And if given the choice between losing one finger and three fingers, I choose one finger.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Final-Fan on 07 September 2017
Azuren said:
Wyrdness said:

With nukes in play that's your only choice other than to try and bring them to the negotiation table.

It's actually not. A blitzkrieg could topple NK before they have a chance to launch anything.

I'm not at all convinced that this is correct—that we could both strike before they could respond with nuclear weapons AND be sure of eliminating all of their second strike capability. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Azuren on 07 September 2017
Final-Fan said:
Azuren said:

It's actually not. A blitzkrieg could topple NK before they have a chance to launch anything.

I'm not at all convinced that this is correct—that we could both strike before they could respond with nuclear weapons AND be sure of eliminating all of their second strike capability. 

I feel it would give us a better chance than to allow them to continue doing as they please.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames