Great thread except for you comment. NK is making a mistake I believe. I don't think it will be the US that finally reacts to these threats. It will be someone like Japan.
Japan's constitution won't allow it and they expect the U.S. do something. As far as my comment, the U.S. is only going to invade countries that don't have a large military to defend itself. The Bush administration knew there were no WMD's in Iraq and that their military was shakey at best.
Traditionally, NK has been rewarded for bad behavior with better concessions during agreements over their nuclear weapons. That is, the U.S. and others provide more aid to the DPRK in order for them to behave.
Finally this may perhaps stop. Kim Jong-il simply is making waves to prevent anything coming between his son's ascension to power. I have no doubt he fears that were he on his deathbed, his enemies, as he sees them, may attempt a coup, therefor he is warning the world of NK's potential in order to ensure his son's succession.
Japan has been having debates in the Diet over changing their Constitution in order to once again allow for a military. The U.S. has been trying to get them to do so for years, but Japan likes the free protection.
Please try to stay on topic.Japan's constitution won't allow it and they expect the U.S. do something. As far as my comment, the U.S. is only going to invade countries that don't have a large military to defend itself. The Bush administration knew there were no WMD's in Iraq and that their military was shakey at best.
Yes I know about Article 9. They need to change it, it's intent is obsolete.Japan has been having debates in the Diet over changing their Constitution in order to once again allow for a military. The U.S. has been trying to get them to do so for years, but Japan likes the free protection.
Please try to stay on topic.
I doubt this was a deliberate attempt at provocation.
If the Conservative's here had any shred of understanding regarding what it means to fight for freedom (or any real balls) they'd be on board with military action.
I'm curious... why do you think the US would necessarily need to invade NK?As far as my comment, the U.S. is only going to invade countries that don't have a large military to defend itself.
I'm curious... why do you think the US would necessarily need to invade NK?
Yes... but then, there are options other than a full-scale invasion.Because airstrikes don't win wars.
In context with everything else coming out of Pyongyang, I have no idea how you can make that statement.
Everything that has happened in the past few months has been an attempt to inflate the power of the North Korean state, and has not been a direct attempt at provocation. Based on "everything else coming out of Pyongyang," it's pretty obvious to say that this wasn't.
I'm curious... why do you think the US would necessarily need to invade NK?
This doesnt answer my question.Would it be invading with these blatant violations of the cease fire? The Korean war isn't over.
You want to talk about a Commie take over of America? The only freedom we'd have left to fight for if we undertook military action in North Korea is the freedom to stand in line for bread. We can't afford another theater like Afghanistan or Iraq, and for as outdated as their technology is, North Korea would be much more expensive.
How much more do you think this country can afford?
So . . . this was what?
This doesnt answer my question.
Why do you think the US would necessarily need to invade NK?
OK -- STILL not answering the question...Sanctions obviously aren't working. If the U.S. doesn't invade, which I agree isn't an option really, the Navy could at least provide a blockade and shoot down their missle tests.
This doesnt answer my question.
Why do you think the US would necessarily need to invade NK?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?