- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Susan Rice: US can 'tolerate' nuclear weapons in North Korea
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:35 pm to indianswim
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:35 pm to indianswim
Yeah and we've heard all week on this board that the left isn't supporting North Kore and their development of nuclear weapons. Smh.
0
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:36 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Why do you think this?
Because NK already knows they would be obliterated in any major first strike they would engage in. Shifting more resources to these areas would not change that calculus.
As a side note, SK is already strong enough on their own to topple North Korea.
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:40 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:We're talking about pressuring China, not North Korea. North Korea is the side show in the grand scheme of things. You can check my post history over the last month or two and you can see that I've been advocating that we use the North Korea situation to improve our position in the region diplomatically, economically and militarily to counter China's assertion that they should be the dominant power in the region.
Because NK already knows they would be obliterated in any major first strike they would engage in. Shifting more resources to these areas would not change that calculus.
As a side note, SK is already strong enough on their own to topple North Korea.
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:40 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Because NK already knows they would be obliterated in any major first strike they would engage in. Shifting more resources to these areas would not change that calculus.
Considering the decision making process in that nation, I doubt "they" care too much about it
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:40 pm to indianswim
The fact that China "tolerates" NK says a lot.
This post was edited on 8/10/17 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:43 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
There are two EASY options.
1. Stop ALL Chinese flagged cargo ships from unloading their junk on US soil until they get rid of the problem
2. Threaten to arm South Korea and Japan with nuclear weapons.
China would fold in either case.
No they wouldn't.
1.) You just start a trade war that would likely plummet us back into a global recession. Without any change to their NK behavior.
2.) Not sure why you think this would do anything but provoke a tit for tat response by China that has no desire to see American presence and military capabilities close to their borders intensified. You could place them there if your argument is deterrence. Not without drawbacks though. But China is not going to magically and suddenly desire to overthrow NK and install a more US friendly regime or allow South Korea, our ally, to envelope the entire land because we arm South Korea. If anything it intensifies the desire to keep a barrier.
This post was edited on 8/10/17 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:44 pm to indianswim
Obama tolerated them because we have known they had at least 60 miniaturized nukes back in 2013
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:45 pm to bonhoeffer45
So you agree with the good Ms. Rice?
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:47 pm to indianswim
I'm sure this administration is hanging on every word and will follow her sage advice. 
I wouldn't take advice from Susan Rice on what to order for lunch.
I wouldn't take advice from Susan Rice on what to order for lunch. Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:47 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
We're talking about pressuring China, not North Korea. North Korea is the side show in the grand scheme of things. You can check my post history over the last month or two and you can see that I've been advocating that we use the North Korea situation to improve our position in the region diplomatically, economically and militarily to counter China's assertion that they should be the dominant power in the region.
No, we were taking about how escalating the arms capabilities of Japan and South Korea would shift the deterrence calculus of North Korea.
You want to talk about using North Korea as a pawn in the China game, then go for it and make the case.
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:50 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
You want to talk about using North Korea as a pawn in the China game, then go for it and make the case.
NK is only a pawn in our relations with China
the only reason NK wasn't destroyed under GWB was China
the only reason NK wasn't destroyed under Obama was China
tell me how we're in a better place appeasing and "tolerating" NK for the past 30 years
tell me how this doesn't show Iran that it can develop its nukes without fear of reprisal b/c of our weakness
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
We have known that NK had miniaturized nukes since 2013
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:54 pm to indianswim
Is she in jail?
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
there is a major gap between "go to war" and "hide and accept a nuclear NK"
Sure, but the only way we ensure that they don't is war
quote:
we have to project strength (not hide from it) and ensure, via China, that NK does not have nuclear weapons. we have to pressure China, both publicly and economically, into solving this solution.
So basically obama strategy.
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:57 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
The answer is too pressure China. I'd move even more anti missile defense systems, naval and air forces into the region, especially areas of concern to China like the South and East China Seas. Assert our dominance over their sphere of influence. Then I'd threaten to give nukes to South Korea and Japan.
So prepare for war.
I mean, I get that there is many things we can do short of a military solution, but in the end they just mirror susan rice's talking point.
The thing is that unless we topple Kim, we will have no way to ensure he doesn't continue his nuclear program. they repeatedly lie about the status, and have said many times they are abandoning it in exchange for things, then not in fact abandon it.
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:59 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
Sure, but the only way we ensure that they don't is war
well we've had really bad policy re: NK for 30 years
we may be past the point of no return. that's on Clinton, Bush, and Obama.
quote:
So basically obama strategy.
Rice is begging Trump to not project strength, which was how Obama handled NK
again, NK is an issue. Iran is the bigger issue. and Obama bent over backwards to be weak towards Iran to give them a swweetheart deal
if we develop an appeasement/tolerance policy re: nuclear proliferation, then we're ensuring a nuclear WW3 in short order
Posted on 8/10/17 at 12:59 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:Yes, because we're losing the peace.
So prepare for war.
quote:Well then I guess you already know what needs to be done.
The thing is that unless we topple Kim, we will have no way to ensure he doesn't continue his nuclear program. they repeatedly lie about the status, and have said many times they are abandoning it in exchange for things, then not in fact abandon it.
Posted on 8/10/17 at 1:00 pm to roadGator
quote:
So you agree with the good Ms. Rice?
I think the current strategy of new sanctions that have the potential to depress a third of their economy, if China fully cooperates on this front, is a wise last ditch effort to attempt a diplomatic solution to this problem.
There are no good options. If there were easy options we would of already used them.
Surgical attacks invite consequential counter measures that could lead to enormous loss of life for allies,inluding triggering a larger war that would require a prolonged ground presence and occupation to win. Which could just trigger a Chinese response like the last Korean war.
Nuking them would create enormous long-term consequences including the strong possibility of tens, hundreds, or millions in collateral damage to allies given retaliation possibilities and fallout due to geographic proximity.
Pressuring China has not born fruit ever, nor has appeasement like Trump initially tried. So the idea there is some magic carrot and stick formula to get China to depose the regime is wishful thinking.
Deterrence sends some ugly signals to would be nuke desiring countries and sets up a long-term dynamic of having a hostile super power that desires military unification of the peninsula of our ally, and a dynamic where miscalculation of signals can set off conflict that threatens the homeland.
This post was edited on 8/10/17 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 8/10/17 at 1:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
Word
If we nuke the shite out of NK and then tell all other new would be nuclear nations the same will happen to them. We might actually be able to stop nuclear proliferation
If we nuke the shite out of NK and then tell all other new would be nuclear nations the same will happen to them. We might actually be able to stop nuclear proliferation
Posted on 8/10/17 at 1:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
NK is only a pawn in our relations with China
the only reason NK wasn't destroyed under GWB was China
the only reason NK wasn't destroyed under Obama was China
tell me how we're in a better place appeasing and "tolerating" NK for the past 30 years
tell me how this doesn't show Iran that it can develop its nukes without fear of reprisal b/c of our weakness
Again, no one is disagreeing that China is an enabler of this issue. That has been an issue since the Korean war.
The issue is the assertion there is some magical alchemy that is going to get China to work against what they view as their strategic self-interest by deposing the NK regime and allowing either a more western friendly puppet regime or unifying the country under the South's leadership. Which in the process will set off an enormous humanitarian crisis and the potential for a failed state on their borders with even greater uncertainty.
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News