My Solution to Address North Korea Provocations

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It seems that firing an interceptor missile in international airspace and hitting some other missile in international airspace could not be interpreted as an act of war. It would also have to be proved who acted. If that happened each time a test were held, little technological progress on the part of North Korea could be made.
Otherwise, there is no possibility of a solution on the Korean Peninsula without the close co-operation of China. Unilateral, direct military action on the part of the U.S. would be catastrophic and extremely dangerous (read, foolhardy).

News Flash!

We have been in a state of War with NoKo since the early 1950s.

It doesn't matter where we shoot down their missiles, just as long as we do shoot them down.

Besides, if we can shoot them down, the closer to launch he better. Once we can prove that NoKo's missiles are impotent...they got nothin'!

I guess no one has ever explained to you what a "cease fire" means.

 

[sealybobo]

We can't sit on our hands like Obama did for (8) years. Under his watch he allowed Iran and NK to continue their development of nuclear weapons thus putting America in harms way.

I have an idea...

We respond militarily

But first, we must take steps to mitigate loss of life in South Korea.

If NK launches, or conduct other ballistic/nuclear test, our order of progression should be;

1- We officially notify North Korea of our intent to destroy their assets relative to nuclear and ballistic development. Our response will be carried out if they conduct (1) more missile launch or test of any kind

2- We start the immediate evacuation (voluntary) of the South Korea. Yes, this will be a logistic nightmare beyond all compare. Hopefully, other Nations (certainly) our allies will assist in this massive operation.

3- Move our military troops off the Korean peninsula to an area where our rapid response, via airborne paratroopers, can be delivered. Ground invasion to follow

4- Move multiple Naval battle groups to the area for a massive conventional strike

We have to do something. The result of inaction WILL cost more lives than a pre-emptive strike.

We are at the crossroads and history will be our judge

-Geaux

So how's Trump going to handle north Korea? He didn't sound reassuring when he said "we will handle it. We handle everything" sounded weak. Weaker than obama

 

[sealybobo]

It seems that firing an interceptor missile in international airspace and hitting some other missile in international airspace could not be interpreted as an act of war. It would also have to be proved who acted. If that happened each time a test were held, little technological progress on the part of North Korea could be made.
Otherwise, there is no possibility of a solution on the Korean Peninsula without the close co-operation of China. Unilateral, direct military action on the part of the U.S. would be catastrophic and extremely dangerous (read, foolhardy).

News Flash!

We have been in a state of War with NoKo since the early 1950s.

It doesn't matter where we shoot down their missiles, just as long as we do shoot them down.

Besides, if we can shoot them down, the closer to launch he better. Once we can prove that NoKo's missiles are impotent...they got nothin'!

I guess no one has ever explained to you what a "cease fire" means.

North Korea has missiles that can reach Chicago. What's Trump gonna do?

 

[Geaux4it]

It seems that firing an interceptor missile in international airspace and hitting some other missile in international airspace could not be interpreted as an act of war. It would also have to be proved who acted. If that happened each time a test were held, little technological progress on the part of North Korea could be made.
Otherwise, there is no possibility of a solution on the Korean Peninsula without the close co-operation of China. Unilateral, direct military action on the part of the U.S. would be catastrophic and extremely dangerous (read, foolhardy).

News Flash!

We have been in a state of War with NoKo since the early 1950s.

It doesn't matter where we shoot down their missiles, just as long as we do shoot them down.

Besides, if we can shoot them down, the closer to launch he better. Once we can prove that NoKo's missiles are impotent...they got nothin'!

I guess no one has ever explained to you what a "cease fire" means.

North Korea has missiles that can reach Chicago. What's Trump gonna do?

Stop them by war before they can put a nuke on them

-Geaux

 

[there4eyeM]

Exactly what reasonable people fear.

 

[Richard-H]

It seems that firing an interceptor missile in international airspace and hitting some other missile in international airspace could not be interpreted as an act of war. It would also have to be proved who acted. If that happened each time a test were held, little technological progress on the part of North Korea could be made.
Otherwise, there is no possibility of a solution on the Korean Peninsula without the close co-operation of China. Unilateral, direct military action on the part of the U.S. would be catastrophic and extremely dangerous (read, foolhardy).

News Flash!

We have been in a state of War with NoKo since the early 1950s.

It doesn't matter where we shoot down their missiles, just as long as we do shoot them down.

Besides, if we can shoot them down, the closer to launch he better. Once we can prove that NoKo's missiles are impotent...they got nothin'!

I guess no one has ever explained to you what a "cease fire" means.

i guess no one ever explained the difference between a cease fire agreement and a peace treaty to you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It seems that firing an interceptor missile in international airspace and hitting some other missile in international airspace could not be interpreted as an act of war. It would also have to be proved who acted. If that happened each time a test were held, little technological progress on the part of North Korea could be made.
Otherwise, there is no possibility of a solution on the Korean Peninsula without the close co-operation of China. Unilateral, direct military action on the part of the U.S. would be catastrophic and extremely dangerous (read, foolhardy).

News Flash!

We have been in a state of War with NoKo since the early 1950s.

It doesn't matter where we shoot down their missiles, just as long as we do shoot them down.

Besides, if we can shoot them down, the closer to launch he better. Once we can prove that NoKo's missiles are impotent...they got nothin'!

I guess no one has ever explained to you what a "cease fire" means.

i guess no one ever explained the difference between a cease fire agreement and a peace treaty to you.

I guess no one ever explained to you that there was no peace treaty at the cessation of hostilities at the end of the Korean War.

Any attempt to shoot down their missile could be seen as a resumption of hostilities by the US.

Never argue with a history major and former military officer. We will kick your ass on the topic and enjoy every minute of it.

 

[Richard-H]

It seems that firing an interceptor missile in international airspace and hitting some other missile in international airspace could not be interpreted as an act of war. It would also have to be proved who acted. If that happened each time a test were held, little technological progress on the part of North Korea could be made.
Otherwise, there is no possibility of a solution on the Korean Peninsula without the close co-operation of China. Unilateral, direct military action on the part of the U.S. would be catastrophic and extremely dangerous (read, foolhardy).

News Flash!

We have been in a state of War with NoKo since the early 1950s.

It doesn't matter where we shoot down their missiles, just as long as we do shoot them down.

Besides, if we can shoot them down, the closer to launch he better. Once we can prove that NoKo's missiles are impotent...they got nothin'!

I guess no one has ever explained to you what a "cease fire" means.

i guess no one ever explained the difference between a cease fire agreement and a peace treaty to you.

I guess no one ever explained to you that there was no peace treaty at the cessation of hostilities at the end of the Korean War.

Any attempt to shoot down their missile could be seen as a resumption of hostilities by the US.

Never argue with a history major and former military officer. We will kick your ass on the topic and enjoy every minute of it.

Considering that I kicked your ass silly when we debated Germany's response Pearl Harbor, somehow I'm not worried.

I suggest you get your money back from whatever scam gave you a history degree.

My original statement stands - we are still in a state of war with NoKo. The cease fire agreement did not change that.

NoKo's nuclear and missile program, combined with their stated intentions to strike the U.S. nullify any cease fire agreement.

Or is your idea of a cease fire agreement mean that we're just supposed to do nothing while they nuke us?

 

[Geaux4it]

Seems my comments relative to how to deal with NK are not so out of bounds after all

From the OP

2- We start the immediate evacuation (voluntary) of the South Korea. Yes, this will be a logistic nightmare beyond all compare. Hopefully, other Nations (certainly) our allies will assist in this massive operation.

4- Move multiple Naval battle groups to the area for a massive conventional strike

-Geaux

Mark Hertling, a retired US Army general and CNN analyst, said the tens of thousands of US civilians, many of them military dependents, would first need to be evacuated from South Korea.
"How do you get the families off the peninsula? You have to do that first," he said.

The US would also need to add to its forces in the region in what Hertling called "a reinforcement of shooters." These would include US Navy ships and submarines armed with cruise missiles,

Before a North Korea war, we'd see this - CNNPolitics

 

[Slash]

Seems my comments relative to how to deal with NK are not so out of bounds after all

From the OP

2- We start the immediate evacuation (voluntary) of the South Korea. Yes, this will be a logistic nightmare beyond all compare. Hopefully, other Nations (certainly) our allies will assist in this massive operation.

4- Move multiple Naval battle groups to the area for a massive conventional strike

-Geaux

Mark Hertling, a retired US Army general and CNN analyst, said the tens of thousands of US civilians, many of them military dependents, would first need to be evacuated from South Korea.
"How do you get the families off the peninsula? You have to do that first," he said.

The US would also need to add to its forces in the region in what Hertling called "a reinforcement of shooters." These would include US Navy ships and submarines armed with cruise missiles,

Before a North Korea war, we'd see this - CNNPolitics

On #2, north Korea would HAVE to see that as a call to war if we started moving 26 MILLION people from the Seoul area and tried taking away their only leverage to deter an attack. Then you've got millions of people outside of their houses when the attacks hit and clogged roads leaving them in the open.

I really think my policy would be this. North Korea offers us nothing. We don't buy oil from them, toys from them. We have NO vested interest in a war with them from what I can see and any way you slice it millions of S. Korean's are likely being sent to their graves. So stop the rhetoric. Just flat out ignore anything they say and pretend they don't exist. Tell the UN do whatever the hell you want. Tell South Korea and China do whatever the hell you want with them. Abstain from any vote on sanctions. Don't give them or take a dime anyways though.

 

[whitehall]

Why can't we sit on our hands like Obama did? The short answer is that the mainstream media is promoting a crisis. N.K. can't put a rocket together that will go twenty miles much less attack a nuclear device to it. The MSM is acting in a criminal conspiracy with the little pot bellied pig to create hysteria for a couple of reasons, first to sell paper and air time and second to paint the new President into a corner and undermine his credibility.

 

[danielpalos]

In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

When is the right wing going to, get serious.